+ core. christos > On Jun 16, 2020, at 3:31 PM, Alexander Nasonov <alnsn%yandex.ru@localhost> wrote: > > Christos Zoulas wrote: >> >> >>> On Jun 16, 2020, at 2:17 PM, Alexander Nasonov <alnsn%yandex.ru@localhost> wrote: >>> >>> If my reading of the current commit guideline is correct, a case >>> of renaming already released application doesn't fall into the >>> "obvious" fix because some people can possibly object to breaking >>> backward compatibility. >> >> You are correct, and this is why I discussed it with core before doing it. In fact >> the name "block" instead of "deny" was suggested by a core member: I chose >> "block" over "deny" because of similarity to the previous name, >> and because some of the API's start with "bl_" and would not need to be >> modified. If "deny" was chosen instead, these would probably need to be >> changed to "dl_" and that prefix is associated with the dynamic linker. > > Clause 4 (and probably others) needs a serious overhaul to make > sure that all cases that needs a review reach everyone who has a > voice (and who can potentially object) before involving the Core, > if necessary. > > The current wording isn't inclusive, period. > > -- > Alex
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP